Reminder: no personal attacks

[Project Willow]

It's not claws, it's transference, six months of tiresome transference.

You're grown up now. Welcome to ignore.

[Searcher08]

Might as well attempt to settle up.

And if Willow happens to read this, I genuinely don't know what the phrase 'hoe in a row' means

Hoe it a row, meaning don't make for it a garden or till it fertile soil in which to grow. You do that when you encourage victims (outside of yourself, or your community and in public) to look within themselves for the answer to their victimization.

I have no interest in arguing about it, however. You and I already failed (agonizingly) at establishing a shared understanding of similar concepts which happen to sit at the foundation of much feminist thought.

As to the rest, if you're unclear why I yelled at you, just ask. As is usually the case, I regret the form, not the sentiment.

Thank you for answering my question regarding the phrase. I often take things very literally - so when you said it my first thought was "How does Willow know my garden needs attention?"
I'm o.k. that you yelled at me and don't mind clean clear anger at all.
We have a major conflict between us in terms of our respective meta-programs - and probably clashing Myers Briggs styles - (am an ENTP) - which gets amplified virtually. IRL I bet we would get along really well, like JR and 8bit did.

[stefano]

Thanks Jack. slimmouse, perhaps your problem with rigour flows from the fact that your theories collapse in the face of the most modest logical probing? The last time I remember having an argument with you was when you endorsed some bullshit about Mauna Kea and couldn't answer a single question put to you. I have plenty of reservations about my generally rational worldview but unfortunately the woo I come across is thin thin soup, and its defenders singularly inept at formulating a coherent and persuasive case. I'm the guy who goes to haunted houses at night to see ghosts and never does.

As for 'this board has gone to shit' - it's moving faster than ever before is one thing, but it's no more hostile to woo than it's been in my experience. The woo posters just can't be arsed to make an effort. And I realise that I'm not one to talk having posted like three times this year but I'm trying to stay off the computer. Miss you all though mwa mwa.

[LilyPatToo]

I hesitate to bring up Hugh's mindset again in a thread on personal attacks (ducks/covers), but his take on woo and W.O.O. has always struck me as a good initial sorting form when I encounter anything Fortean. The former is what I think of as the genuine Unknown, the rare breakthroughs of Other into our mundane lives. But the Wonderment Occluding Objectivity (hope i have that right--haven't seen it discussed here for a while) is prime RI territory. We've seen it wielded by mil/int types all over the UFO, abduction and psychic areas of the fringe. Jeff's written great stuff about both aspects and the best discussions I've found online about them are right here.

I too wish we talked about both kinds more often and more cordially. For a lot of years, I've avoided most of it, after having found out about exploitative psy-ability-connected things that were done to me as a child (and later on too) by creepy intel-connected people. But lately I'm taking another look into the muddied, stinking waters in hope of finding gold and this time being better able to sort it from the dross and the fool-me-once counterfeits.

I'm aware that to Hugh it all looks like W.O.O., but I know firsthand that that's not so. Wish we talked about all of it more--faux and real. It's not easy for me to stick my neck out in a woo thread and risk being summarily slapped down, but it's become important enough to me to risk personal attacks just to possibly learn something new and develop more rigor. Not all of us are casual entertainment seekers, True Believers or in search of titillation, stefano. Not sure I could meet your standards of proof, but your questions will probably be interesting...

LilyPat

[Joe Hillshoist]

There is a thread about elephants mourning the guy who gave them sanctuary ... even tho how could they know and aren't they sposed to be "dumb animals"?

[Rory]

eyeno's gone? what a catastrophe

[sergeant stiletto]

...Jeff's written great stuff about both aspects and the best discussions I've found online about them are right here...

I too wish we talked about both kinds more often and more cordially...

Wish we talked about all of it more--faux and real. It's not easy for me to stick my neck out in a woo thread and risk being summarily slapped down, but it's become important enough to me to risk personal attacks just to possibly learn something new and develop more rigor. Not all of us are casual entertainment seekers, True Believers or in search of titillation, stefano. Not sure I could meet your standards of proof, but your questions will probably be interesting...

Could not agree more.

It is, after all, a discussion board. If any of us had all of the answers we wouldn't be here but it often feels like some think they do and enjoy trolling the rest.

[slimmouse]

Thanks Jack. slimmouse, perhaps your problem with rigour flows from the fact that your theories collapse in the face of the most modest logical probing? The last time I remember having an argument with you was when you endorsed some bullshit about Mauna Kea and couldn't answer a single question put to you. I have plenty of reservations about my generally rational worldview but unfortunately the woo I come across is thin thin soup, and its defenders singularly inept at formulating a coherent and persuasive case. I'm the guy who goes to haunted houses at night to see ghosts and never does.
.

Perhaps some of us are just not meant to see. I dunno .

Meanwhile, Ive just been to a haunted thread. Im assuming its this one you're talking about ;

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... ea#p337557

Which questions did I not answer to your satisfaction ?

Finally, might I suggest that consensus reality is probably as consum-ee as they get to many. But dont take my word for it. Like yourself , Im still looking for that ghost. However, More and more, im coming to believe that abscence of evidence by ones own eyes in a field saturated by anecdotal evidence and much much more tends to suggest more about the dangers of our egotistical rigour than anything else. Ive consequently stopped assuming that because I personally havent seen him, he doesnt exist., since far wiser people than myself make such claims , and for the time being, that'll actually do for me.

[DrEvil]

Meanwhile, Ive just been to a haunted thread. Im assuming its this one you're talking about ;

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... ea#p337557

Which questions did I not answer to your satisfaction ?

I believe I can help!
If you reread page 12 of the thread you linked you will find that you didn't answer a single question that Stefano asked. You made statements about "facts" that turned out to be untrue, he called you on it and your replies consisted of insults and non-answers.
And what is a "tangential adjustment"? Is that what you do when your theory doesn't fit the facts?

[barracuda]

Could someone please help me out? I feel as if I may be on the verge of a personal attack on Hugh. HOLD ME BACK

[Forgetting2]

[solace]

Could someone please help me out? I feel as if I may be on the verge of a personal attack on Hugh. HOLD ME BACK

[Simulist]

Could someone please help me out? I feel as if I may be on the verge of a personal attack on Hugh. HOLD ME BACK

With Hugh's latest one, so was I for an instant. But then a few friends and I went out, and we saw Dark Shadows. Hugh's latest creation ex nihilo didn't cross my mind even once.

(And, I think I can safely say, the movie brought the house down.)

[crikkett]

Coincidentally, the entire VHS collection of Dark Shadows was put out for sale at my thrift shop today 25¢ each. Place yer orders here!

[Simulist]

Coincidentally, the entire VHS collection of Dark Shadows was put out for sale at my thrift shop today 25¢ each. Place yer orders here!

It was interesting to look around us in the theater yesterday before the movie started: almost every single person there was older than we were. Which was interesting. I heard one silver-haired lady say, "I love Johnny Depp. He's always so good, you know. He's playing Barabbas!"

For a moment there, I wondered if I'd wandered in to a religious flick by mistake.